NABAJYOTI DAS Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sealed tenders were invited by the Office of the Executive Engineer, Inland Water Transport Division, Dibrugarh vide Notice Inviting Tender dated 19.01.2017 for settlement of Ferry Service under the said Division for the financial years 2017-2018 and 2018-2019. The present case relates to one of the Ferry Service i.e. Dibrugarh-Majorbari Ferry Service. The terms and conditions of the Tender, relevant to the issue in hand, are Clause 7(a) and Clause 10 (b). As these two clauses have utmost relevance in adjudicating the present petition, the relevant provisions are extracted hereunder:

(2.) As many as five persons submitted tender, including the petitioner and the respondent no. 5 herein. As per the Comparative Statement, the petitioner Nabajyoti Das offered a bid of Rs.4,41,275/- and the respondent No. 5 Arup Chetia offered Rs.3,35,000. In terms of monetary bid, the petitioner was placed in the second position and the respondent no. 5 in the fourth position. The Tender Committee in its meeting held on 27.02.2017 had scrutinised the tender papers of all the five tenderers and recorded that the first bidder Dhrubajyoti Gogoi failed to submit Land Valuation Certificate. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, he has submitted Land Valuation Certificate which was issued by Circle Officer and failed to submit Income Tax Return Certificate. The third bidder Sunanjoy Gogoi failed to submit Boat Affidavit and his Land Valuation Certificate was issued by a private valuer. The fourth bidder i.e. the respondent no. 5 herein submitted all the required documents as per the terms and conditions of the Notice Inviting Tender. On this evaluation, the Tender Committee recommended settlement in favour of the fourth bidder who is the respondent no. 5 herein. On 16.05.2017, the settlement order in favour of the respondent no. 5 was issued under the hand of the Joint Secretary to the Government of Assam, Transport Department, granting settlement of Dibrugarh-Majorbari Ferry Service for the period 2017-2019 at his tendered amount of Rs.3,35,000/- on per year basis. This order of settlement dated 16.05.2017 is put to challenge in the present writ petition.

(3.) Mr. S. K. Medhi, learned senior counsel representing the petitioner submits that the impugned settlement order dated 16.05.2017 is illegal and arbitrary on three counts. Firstly, the petitioner was not informed of the rejection of his bid despite having tendered a higher bid than the respondent no. 5. Secondly, the Land Valuation Certificate submitted along with his tender papers was proper in all respects, inasmuch as, the Circle Officer who had issued the certificate is also a revenue authority and competent to issue Land Valuation Certificate. Thirdly, there was no requirement to submit Income Tax Return Certificate in view of the fact that his bid amount was Rs.4,41,275/-, which is on per annum basis and, therefore, saved by Clause 10(b) which, inter alia, stipulates that submission of Income Tax Return Certificate is not mandatory in case of tenderers whose bid is less than Rs.6 Lakhs.